ORDER : 1. These writ petitions are filed against common respondents but with the prayer that the petitioners are entitled for payment of interest on delayed payment of retiral dues. Since, these writ petitions raises common question, therefore, we are deciding these writ petitions with common order. 2. For ready reference, we are reproducing prayer of lead matter from Writ Petition No.11942/2023 and same is reproduced as under:- (i) The respondents may be directed to submits the complete record relating to the present case before this Hon’ble Court; (ii) By issuing appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents may be directed to pay the Compound Interest on delayed payment of Gratuity @ of 10% on Rs.11,06,818 for the period of 30.06.2021 to 17.03.2023. (iii) by issuing appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents may be directed to pay the Compound Interest on and for delayed payment of Encashment of Earned Leave of 300 days @ of 10% on Rs.6,74,780/- for the period of 30.06.2021 to 02.05.2023. 3. The material on record indicate that petitioner Ramesh Singh has superannuated on 30.06.2021, Prahald Singh Rathore on 31.03.2020, Himmat Singh on 30.06.2019, Omveer Singh on 31.07.2019, Rajkumar Sharma on 31.05.2020. 4. Writ Petition No.4159/2025 is filed by Ram Kishore Pareek, Satyanaryan Sharma, Hukum Chand Verma, Pramod Kumar Sharma, Shankar Lal Gupta, Ram Swaroop Verma and Kailash Babu Sharma jointly, and as per details in the writ petition Ram Kishore Pareek superannuated on 30.06.2018, Satyanarayan Sharma on 31.07.2018, Hukum Chand Verma on 31.07.2017, Pramod Kumar Sharma on 31.03.2018, Shankar Lal Gupta on 30.06.2016, Ram Swaroop Verma on 30.06.2018 and Kailash Babu Sharma on 31.08.2019. 5. Learned counsel for petitioners while relying upon order dated 06.07.2022 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16191/2019, Praveen Kumar Singh Vs. Managing Director, RTDC & Anr. and connected matters submitted that respondents were directed to pay interest @ 9% per annum on delayed payment of retiral dues from the date, the same became due till actual payment. He also submitted that this order was upheld by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court on 18.12.2023, therefore, these writ petitions be decided in accordance with aforementioned judgements. 6. Learned counsel for respondents admits the disposal of writ petitions and Special Appeal Writ as referred by learned counsel for petitioners. He also submitted that this order was upheld by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court on 18.12.2023, therefore, these writ petitions be decided in accordance with aforementioned judgements. 6. Learned counsel for respondents admits the disposal of writ petitions and Special Appeal Writ as referred by learned counsel for petitioners. Learned counsel for respondents submit that the matter may be disposed of on the basis of order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court and approved by Hon’ble Division Bench. 7. This Court has considered an issue related to what constitutes retiral dues in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8496/2025 titled as Dr. Rajendra Prasad Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. and connected matters following paragraphs are reproduced from the judgment in case of Dr. Rajendra Prasad Vs. State of Rajasthan (supra), to show that what are retiral dues :- (1). As per information on website of Pension Department (https/pension.raj.gov.in), the retiral benefits are considered as under:- (i) Pension, (ii) Dearness Relief, (iii) Family Pension, (iv) Death-cum-retirement gratuity, (v) Commutation of Pension, (2). As per Income-Tax Department, the retiral benefits are considered as under for the purpose of taxability:- (i) Gratuity, (ii) Pension, (iii) Leave Encashment Salary, (iv) Provident Fund, (3). As per Pension Portal of Government of India, retiral benefits are listed as under: (i) Pension, (ii) Commutation of Pension, (iii) Death-cum-retirement gratuity, (iv) General Provident Fund and Incentives, (v) Contributory Provident Fund, (vi) Leave Encashment, (vii) Central Govt. Employees Group Insurance Scheme (CGEGIS), (viii) TA for settlement at a station after retirement. 8. Aforementioned clearly indicate that Pension, Dearness Relief, Family Pension, Death-cum-Gratuity, Commutation of Pension, Leave Encashment Salary, amount paid under the CGEGIS and TA for settlement at the station after retirement, are included in retiral benefits and an individual on superannuation is entitled to receive retiral dues according to rules. 9. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Praveen Kumar Singh Vs. Managing Director (supra) and connected matters has directed the respondents to pay all retiral dues to the petitioners within a specified period with interest @ 9% per annum on delayed payment of retiral dues. The judgment of Coordinate Bench was challenged before the Division Bench by the respondents, but special appeals writ were dismissed on 18.12.2023. 10. Managing Director (supra) and connected matters has directed the respondents to pay all retiral dues to the petitioners within a specified period with interest @ 9% per annum on delayed payment of retiral dues. The judgment of Coordinate Bench was challenged before the Division Bench by the respondents, but special appeals writ were dismissed on 18.12.2023. 10. The Division Bench while dismissing D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.557/2023 on 18.12.2023 has observed as under:- Though submission of learned counsel for the appellants is that the statutory provisions with regard to payment of interest @ 9% per annum is confined in respect of delay in payment of retiral dues, which includes only gratuity and not leave encashment, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge, who has granted interest taking into consideration the delay in payment of leave encashment benefits. Even if there is no specific provision contained in the statutory rules, in appropriate case, in order to do complete justice, interest could always be awarded by the Court. It is also stated at bar that entire amount payable to the respondents-petitioners in compliance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge has already been paid. 11. The petitioners have demanded interest on delayed payment on retiral dues and this Court has already considered payment of interest for delay and rate of interest is assessed at the rate of 9% per annum. Even, the State Government has prescribed payment of 9% interest per annum under Rules 89 of the Pension Rules, 1996 on delayed payment of retiral benefits, therefore, these writ petitions are liable to be disposed of in accordance with judgment in case of Praveen Kumar Singh Vs. Managing Director (supra). 12. In view of discussion made hereinabove, these writ petitions are disposed of and respondents are directed to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum to the petitioner(s) on delayed payment of retiral dues for the period of delay as laid down in case of Praveen Kumar Singh Vs. Managing Director (supra). 13. The writ petitions along with misc. application(s), if any, stands disposed of.